On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:22, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> This looks pretty good. But why are we bothering to keep $prolog at all any
> more, if all we're going to pass it is &PL_sv_no all the time? Maybe we'll
> have a use for it in the future, but right now we don't appear to unless I'm
> missing something.
I don't see any reason to keep it around.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2011-02-01 17:01:39|
|Subject: Re: SSI patch version 14|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2011-02-01 16:43:29|
|Subject: Re: Error code for "terminating connection due to conflict with recovery" |